Toledo Uncappers Getting Shafted 843
Jacob writes "Broadband Reports has a well written article detailing the plight of those Ohio cable modem users who found themselves facing gun wielding FBI agents for uncapping their cable modems. Buckeye Cable has clearly crossed a line and the tech community and consumer groups should be all over them like a wet, angry rag. Kudos to Broadband Reports for not letting this thing die." Granted, those who were indicted were violating their service contracts, but having their posessions siezed by FBI agents is overkill.
OT Can this be done on DSL too? (Score:2)
No. Cable only, and here's why (and how). (Score:5, Interesting)
With DSL, there is a direct physical line from the subscriber to the ISP. By capping the maximum speed their network device will exchange data on that line, the ISP can effectively control your net access speed.
With cable, it's different. There is a single wire (a loop actually) that runs through the neighborhood and each user taps into that line. A certain frequency block on that wire is set aside for cable, and the bandwidth provided by that frequency block is shared among all the cable modems connected to it. When you hear DSL ads bashing cable companies for delivering shared net access that slows down when too many people in your neighborhood sign on, this is what they're talking about.
Up until a bit ago, this was very valid criticism. Typically, one node could provide 30Mbps to a neighborhood, and a single cable modem could snatch up a max of 10Mbps of that for its own use. It was a lot like being plugged into a hub. When usage spiked, you were in collision city. However, cable providers have started sending out configuration files to cable modems telling them to only snag a certain amount of bandwidth. This allows them to provide tiered service on a shared medium. What the people mentioned in the article did was send their modems an alternate configuration file saying "Hey! I know I (the cable company) previously told you that you could only use 128kbps of bandwidth, but now you can take as much as you want up to 2.5Mbps!" Since the cable company victims only did this when they "wanted to transfer large amounts of data quickly," they generated usage spikes way beyond normal, especially considering how much bandwidth they allocated to themselves.
So why crack down so hard on someone whose actions didn't cause any real and lasting damage to the company? The simple answer is that broadband ISPs are in the business of charging as much as they can get away with, and trying to get you to use as little as possible. Their business models depend upon subscribers buying "high speed internet access" and not using it. Simply put, if you're really a "power user" and want to do any of the things you see on "lightning fast internet access" commercials such as downloading digital video or transferring large files, broadband ISPs don't want you on their network. You're belong to a class of customers that uses what it pays for, and not the vast majority who just chat online and check their email twice a day. The fact that they could scare others into lower usage levels by bringing in intimidating government forces was just a plus.
The only difference between this and the (RI|MP)AA sueing their fans or the BSA sending out "You have ten days to buy our software or we'll audit you and possibly take legal action," letters is that cable companies are prosecuting based on the contents misguided contracts and the (RI|MP)AA and BSA are prosecuting based on the contents of misguided US law.
Re:No. Cable only, and here's why (and how). (Score:5, Informative)
And putting the throttle in the equipment at the customer end of the cable was a big mistake, opening a major can of worms. (Especially given that some customers own their own equipment...) Makes it vulnerable to tampering, leading the company into playing "whack-a-mole", in this case with a BIG mallet.
The proper solution is to do the throttling at the head end. Downstream you can limit bandwidth with a subscriber management box between the head end and the backbone. Upstream the cable systems assign timeslots to each modem from a central box. So you can limit upstream bandwidth by limiting the timeslots. (Or just have the SMS drop the extra packets - which will cause TCP connections to throttle back.)
Of course that means the cable companies have to buy an SMS, rather than pestering the FBI to bust their subscribers.
Re:No. Cable only, and here's why (and how). (Score:3, Insightful)
Never, _ever_ trust the client side to be secure or in your control.
Re:No. Cable only, and here's why (and how). (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Security Through Obscurity (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Actually they were just being cheap. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:The FBI (Score:3, Funny)
stoners have it easy, how long does it take to flush a baggie down the toilet?
whatchoo gonna do when they come for you?
Move to New Zealand... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Move to New Zealand... (Score:3, Interesting)
However, my ISP is soon going to increase the monthly cap to 15GB down 15GB up, and offer 10GB for 10$ canadian in advance. So we'll have a per-GB cost of about 60-70 cents US on residential service, not bad.
Isn't this America? (Score:5, Insightful)
What a sad state of affairs.
Re:Isn't this America? (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, I do indeed love this country.
Re:Isn't this America? (Score:5, Insightful)
The civil forfeiture laws are worse than a lot of the laws we bitch about on here. The War on Drugs opened the door for this, and believe me, they will try to extend it to any area they can. Allowing the police to profit from confiscating property only gives them incentive to manufacture crimes where there are none.
The current civil forfeiture laws are horrible, but law enforcement will fight tooth and nail to keep them in effect. The potential for these laws to be abused makes the DMCA look fairly innoccuos in comparison.
FEAR.org [fear.org] has some info regarding these laws as well.
Don't think that just because you're not a pot-head or a "hacker" that it can't happen to you!
Re:Isn't this America? (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course there is also a lot of money to be made building prisons to put all of these evil criminals in as well.
Let's not forget how much can be made by selling the drugs which the laws make very profitable.
The little Iran/Contra affair we had a while back demonstrated in front of Congress and the world that high ranking members of the US government were deeply involved in the international drug trade. Oh yeah, nobody remembered who really did what in that, did they? I suppose they all quit that and stopped returning the calls. Oh well, at least none of them will show their faces in public again will they?
Except for Poindexter. He will just be in charge of tracking your every action.
This is not a nightmare. Things really are this bad.
Re:Hey! He looks like you, Poindexter! (Score:3, Informative)
It was about selling drugs to get the money to buy the guns to trade to the Iranians for the return of our hostages. It was illegal to give Iran military weapons. Any government department that has any legal money whatsoever gets that money from Congress since that is one of the major roles of Congress. So since they were not authorized to give weapons to those countries, they had to come up with another source of income. So they imported and sold large amounts of cocaine to fund their illegal operation. This, in a nutshell, is what happened.
Re:Isn't this America? (Score:5, Insightful)
So is summary execution.
Rarely is either justifiable.
Re:Isn't this America? (Score:3, Insightful)
Many (most?) of the people killed deserve it, but I'd rather foot the bill to keep them alive in prison forever than kill any innocent people.
Re:Isn't this America? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Isn't this America? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Isn't this America? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Isn't this America? (Score:5, Informative)
I'm certain that's a comforting thought to Jose Padilla [wtnh.com] who's been imprisoned since May [stanley2002.org] without a trial, access to a lawyer, a telephone call, or one moment without bright lights shining down on him. Yes, the man has to learn how to sleep with the lights on in his tiny cell in a military brig. Anyone who's read 1984 [online-literature.com] will recognize the rooms with the brights always on with no windows as belonging to the Ministry of Love [online-literature.com]. I've got news for you; our rights have been eroding for some time, and Sept 11 gave the resident president all the power he needed [eff.org] to bring about a landslide. I hope to God there's a major backlash and soon, or there won't be much left [cornell.edu] of this country for our children. They'll have to read about it in books, so long as the books they're reading don't make the government suspicious [philly.com]. Perhaps my children will one day turn me in [online-literature.com] to the FBI [villagevoice.com] for being unamerican [washington.edu].
Re:Isn't this America? (Score:5, Informative)
That being said, the agents may have been abusing their authority by taking the VCR, for instance. Or the warrent could have been too broad, or the items listed on it may have included things that have no bearing on the suspected crime, in which case the judge who signed it made a mistake. But the fact that they siezed private property is nothing unusual.
Re:Isn't this America? (Score:4, Insightful)
Since the War for Southern Independence, when Lincoln "stuff[ed] the Constitution in a hole" (his words, not mine). We ceased to be a Constitutional Republic at that point and our rights have suffered ever since.
Re:Isn't this America? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Isn't this America? (Score:3, Informative)
That said, if these guys' "theft of services" can be spun as misrepresenting the amount of bandwidth they're entitled to access, and they do so over the wire, well then, why wouldn't it be the FBI's job?
Re:Isn't this America? (Score:3, Insightful)
Grow the fuck up.
While you were sleeping (Score:5, Interesting)
"An evil exists that threatens every man, woman and child of this great nation," the leader of another country once wrote. "We must take steps to ensure our domestic security and protect our homeland."
That was Adoph Hitler, writing about creation of the Gestapo in Nazi Germany.
Das Vaterland (Score:3, Insightful)
Your point being?
I'm critical of invoking the Nazis as a metaphor for every excess of government, but in truth the immediate choice of the words "homeland security" made me squirm. It's much like his dad's "New World Order." I don't know if there's any awareness of the echoes of the past. Those who did not study the past are doomed to quote it?
There is nothing wrong with Germans, which is precisely why we need to take seriously their example of nationalism turned ugly. As in the McCarthy experience, we have seen these things get away from us before.
Many of those who voted for or supported the bill have good intentions. Hell is paved with these.
Seems like you'd like Australia then (Score:3, Interesting)
Firearm death rate in Australia: 2.36/100,000. [ryerson.ca] Firearm death rate in the US: 12.9/100,000. [216.239.33.100]
Re:Welcome to America (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Welcome to America (Score:3, Interesting)
That sounds suspiciously like "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need." I'm fairly sure the economic system espoused by the individual who made that statement has been thoroughly discredited by now. At the very least, it was rejected by the voters earlier this month (in most places, anyway).
I'm not scared (Score:5, Funny)
I'm all over the internet like a cheap suit now.
Buckeye Cable just doesn't get security (Score:5, Insightful)
A simple example is CGI scripting. When a client uses their cgi-bin to store scripts, they are putting at risk the contents of their webspace if they are insecure.
The hosting company is relying on the first level of protection for their server being well written secure scripts (this being the site owners only level of protection), but this is out of their control. The second level of protecting their server has is the restriction and security of what client (especially the scripts) may do in their webspace.
Buckeye Cable needs to stop getting the FBI to cover up their lack of security.
-----
hack this site. Get 'em boys. [wallpaperscoverings.com]
Just because... (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, ideally the povider should have everything regulated on their end HOWEVER, that may not be possable in this case. Remember, they don't develop the CM technology, they just buy it. It may not be possable to regulate individual users on the provider end, it may have to be done on the modems themselves.
I don't get this mentality that some geeks have that it's OK to break into computer systems if you can, just because there is a whole in the security. WRONG. The law doesn't say unauthorized system access is illegal only if its hard to do.
This is theft of services, pure and simple. It is no different than changing your electric meter to run slow or illegaly descrambling cable. Doesn't matter how easy or hard to do it is, it's not legal.
Why oh Why (Score:2, Funny)
Astounding.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Astounding.. (Score:5, Funny)
I dunno man...if that's juvenille, than I don't know if a word exists for what passes for conversation here sometimes....
Re:Astounding.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Huh? It's their network. It's outright stupid for them to not understand exactly how their network behaves. Security-by-lawyer really isn't that good of a network protocol...
Yes and No (Score:3, Insightful)
HOWEVER.....I don't want this to be just another situation where someone knowingly breaks the law, steals (it's bandwidth, but it DOES cost money), and then Slashdot readers start screaming "Free them! Fight the Power! Stand up to the man!". These guys knew what they were doing. Their ISP should not only drop them, but they should face legal sanction of SOME kind. Not prison, obviously, but a hefty fine and some community service time at least.
The way they were busted was indeed extreme. Don't go to the other end of the scale and insist there should be no punishement at all. By calling it a "virtual crime", you seem to mock the idea that it was a crime at all. It was, and proper punishement is still deserved. Only the scale of the reaction and the level of punishement should be called into question here.
Re:Astounding.. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is yet another example of how far out of control the FBI has become. This is an abuse of power as frightening as Ruby Ridge or Waco. More so - more so, even. At least in Ruby Ridge and Waco there was at least a pretense that the subjects were armed and potentially violent. These people were just ordinary people working in their homes. It's not like they were distributing child porn, or soliciting 13 year old girls to have sex, or stealing credit card information. They were, in effect, eating "too much" at what was advertised as an all-you-can-eat buffet. The FBI has no business whatsoever being involved here. At most, Buckeye should have sued these people in civil court for breach of contract. Unfortunately for all of us, the cable companies bought themselves laws which basically makes the police their contract enforcement agency.
Shit like this just reinforces my belief that our legal system is broken beyond repair.
Re:Astounding.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's see...could it be that they stole bandwidth? That's right...they stole something. As much as the FBI really shouldn't be involved with this, stealing is stealing, and those who steal should face the consequences.
Spinning bodies (Score:5, Funny)
I think we can add the Founding Fathers to that as well.
let's explain that, shall we? (Score:5, Interesting)
John Weglian, chief of the special units division of the prosecutor's office, offers no apologies for Buckeye's unusually harsh treatment of the uncappers. "Cyber crime is potentially very damaging to society. We are taking a firm position on that type of criminal activity. We hope these cases will have a deterrent value, given the cost factors for the defendants in successful prosecutions."
The cable operators claim a loss of $11,000 for each of the 23 offenders and absurdity at best as the operators had the power to kill service at anytime, if indeed such losses were occuring. The uncpping was detected and the ISP could have terminated the contract with the individuals in question and fined them the cost of the modified equipment.
Now why is this a bother to Orwell and the authors of the US Constitution? Because it is a great step towards the end of free publishing in the US and towards the thought control of 1984. Violating a "service contract" with a monopoly ISP has been equated with serious law breaking. The same service contract includes prohibitions on running "servers" or electronic publications. Prohibiting electronic publications on a monopoly service ammounts to denial of first amendment rights to free speach. The internet is a public place, built largely from public networks on public land and supported by monopoly structures. The implication is that US citizens in the future will be felons if they attempt to express themselves in the electronic commons by runing their own news servers, email, or web servers.
Some people can't stand any competition, but the Founding Fathers knew that that's what a free press is all about. These services are against the wishes of their monopoly ISP wich also happens to be the monopoly telco or carrier of CableTV and all other significant electronic publications in the area. From the publisher's perspective, this is a nice step towards criminalizing competing with them. Not being able to run a free press is something the Founding Fathers would not find funny at all. The first amendment [archives.gov] to the constitution puts free speach and press in the same class as religion and free assembly - inviolate. They also debated extensivly on the evils of exclusive franchise that copyright grants and how to balance that with the good that it can do to promote the useful arts - 14 years only, thank you. They could never have imagined a world of only one large press organization, AP, five music publishers, three broadcast networks and the technological steps those entrenched intersts would take to preserve and extend their power.
Orwell precicted such control through technology and it's ultimate results. These "untaper" federal cases combined with Paladium, are a great step towards 1984. Paladium, with its concept of "trusted computing" will assure that personal computers will spy on their owners, who can only use them to recieve official propaganda. Orwell saw it comming.
The stage has been well set by the large publishers and you are discredited. They have issued a long string of kiddie porn arrests and news storries about the demise of music publishers. These storries have convinced the public that the free internet is responsible for the demise of popular music and an increase in child molestation. "Hackers" have been equated with child molesters, warez losers and other "pirates" and parisites. this wired story [wired.com] does a good job of demolishing the connection between child molestation and the internet, but the readership of Wired is nothing compared to MSNBC/Time-Warner/AOL/McDonalds/AP/Conglomoram/GE. Your neighbors may not pitty you when the FBI coyly knocks on your door. "Why esle would anyone want to have all that bandwith or run a server?" a clueless populance will ask. You have been painted as some kind of pervert that treatens the great public circus, home, harth and the whole "entertainment ifrastruture" without which the US economy would obviously colapse.
I invite one and all to see exactly what I want to do with my internet connection [68.96.149.199]. It's simple, I want to share my life with relatives that live in different states and my interests with anyone who cares. There's nothing Earth shattering here, not even bad music.
On December 1st, my modest site will go black when my contract with Cox Cable expires. The nose has tightened slowly, every six months brought some new loss of service and increase in costs, and it is now intollerable. I'm not willing to pay $75/month to simply surf the great corporate billboard nor am I willing to give money to a company with the same contract terms and philosophy as Buckeye.
Don't worry, I'll keep posting here on Slashdot. Now you know who twitter is.
The article looks to be getting Slashdotted (Score:5, Informative)
For the record, uncapping ( hacking your modem in order to gain access to untapped bandwidth) is not legal. Those who perform the practice can expect retaliation from their broadband provider, and should expect serious repercussions for doing so. That said, one Ohio ISP has taken punishment for the practice to an unprecedented level that should raise the eyebrows of providers, customers, and concerned citizens alike.
The Block family is the Rupert Murdoch of Toledo, Ohio. The company controls several major area newspapers (including The Toledo Blade), one of the area's television stations (TV5 Toledo), a dial up provider, Buckeye Cable, and much more. As such, their control over the political system in the area is considerable, a fact that may under-ride the horrifying journey several individuals are taking through the area's legal gauntlet because they uncapped their cable modems.
Paul Shryock, vice president of information technology at Buckeye Cablesystem, discovered that twenty three of his subscribers were getting more juice from their connections than they paid for. According to an interview in a recent Cable World article, Shyrock noted that one subscriber had "altered his modem to handle 100 megabits per second, up and downstream", though the company could never realistically even obtain such speeds.
Shryock also confirmed the company wasn't sure how customers were getting the extra speed. "We don't fully understand how they're pulling this off just yet, but we're learning more every day."
While the methods Shryock used to discover the offenders who weren't going download crazy is somewhat of a mystery, a greater mystery is how Shyrock came up with the cost impact numbers he would later use to nail subscribers to the wall with the help of the FBI.
The FBI's computer crime department needs computer offenses to total over 250,000 dollars before they'll get involved in local crimes. Conveniently for Buckeye cable, Shryock "guesstimated" that the 23 total offenders contributed to more than that amount in bandwidth theft, nearly eleven thousand dollars worth of bandwidth theft per offender.
Instead of disconnecting service for uncapping (as is the case with nearly every provider in the U.S.) Buckeye Cablesystem decided to get the FBI involved. Of the 23 who were to be served search warrants, 17 actually received visits from the FBI and local law enforcement. Seven actually found themselves indicted by the local grand jury and currently face fifth degree felony charges.
One of several defendants we spoke to places his estimated lost income and hardware at over half a million dollars. Brandon Wirtz, who operates more than one business out of his home, was on the verge of releasing a Smartcard based DRM solution for Windows Media Player to several different companies before his life was turned upside-down. Wirtz is a respected young writer, consultant and tech wiz in the industry, and In April will be Awarded a Microsoft MVP award for his involvement in the Windows Media Community.
Thanks to local construction, Wirtz, who never signed a contract with Buckeye, claims his broadband connection was incapable of achieving speeds higher than 128kbps down. By utilizing a Cisco configuration file, he uncapped his Motorola Surfboard modem to 2.5MBps, for what he estimates was no more than a total of 16 hours, and only when he needed to move large files. The worst that could happen to him, he figured, was that his ISP got angry and disconnected his service. He couldn't have been more wrong.
It wasn't long before twelve plain-clothed officers greeted Wirtz at his front door with a search wcoyly asking "Is there anything interesting about your cable?" The officers wound up taking every computer in the house, ironically excluding the PC in his living room that actually installed the uncapping software. Wirtz and his roommate lost at least 8 PC's total, even those who were behind firewalls and incapable of benefitting from the uncapped modem. Law enforcement confiscated all of the hardware from the companies Wirtz built, which contained his work, client contacts, and a book he had written.
Wirtz even lost his VCR in the deal, and Sylvania Township police debated confiscating his Xbox gaming console, but decided to leave it behind. The officers confiscated his legitimate CD copies of Windows Office and several operating systems, all of his burned CD's, and a security card writing machine instead.
Wirtz and several others now face a December 13 court date to determine if they qualify for "diversions", a twelve step program for non-sexual criminal offenders. If Wirtz passes a series of background and substance abuse checks, he may be qualified to pay $3400 in fines and have his record wiped clean if he attends the program. His possessions, client contact information and computers may never be returned, and Wirtz finds himself in a serious financial hole thanks to frightened clients and mounting legal fees, though he's yet to give up on broadband. He's now a happy Wi-Fi customer.
John Weglian, chief of the special units division of the prosecutor's office, offers no apologies for Buckeye's unusually harsh treatment of the uncappers. "Cyber crime is potentially very damaging to society. We are taking a firm position on that type of criminal activity. We hope these cases will have a deterrent value, given the cost factors for the defendants in successful prosecutions."
But not everyone in the region agrees that the case is entirely about bandwidth theft.
George Runner, among those indicted by the grand jury, has had a long history of disagreement with area officials, the Block family included. Runner, a former Lucas County assistant prosecutor, left the area after being accused of stealing county supplies, an act which was caught on videotape by a hidden camera.
That camera, which was illegally placed, forced the resignation of village police chief Lance Martin, and added fuel to the fire of disagreement between Runner and regional officials. According to area locals, the Block family patriarch Paul Block had always disliked George Runner, who the Blocks claimed was overly secretive of details in cases he was prosecuting for the county.
Runner will most likely not be offered the chance to attend the diversions program, and was one of the only offenders forced through booking (mugshots, fingerprints). While it's pure speculation to link Runner's legal problems with his area disagreements, it's something that begs asking. Calls to Runner's attorney's office for comment were not returned by press time.
When the Block family first came to Toledo, Paul Block was rumored to have said he was going to "rip down Toledo and rebuild it in his image". The behavior of Buckeye Cablesystem has many wondering exactly what kind of image he had in mind.
[It ain't karma whoring when posting anonymously]
Buckeye Sucks! (Score:2, Informative)
Where are the guns? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Where are the guns? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Where are the guns? (Score:3, Informative)
The firearms were most likely in holsters on their hips. If you are referring to an "Elian" style raid (with said Agents brandishing MP5s and wearing balaclavas) then you are most likely correct that the article sensationalises the situation.
However... any armed Agent wandering around anyones house in search of a frigging uncapped modem, and evidence to such, is a serious liability in any age. In other words, the alleged crime does not fit the method of search and seizure involved. This matter could be more easily, and less expensively to the taxpayer, dealt via private litigation.
cheers
front
sucks to be them (Score:2, Troll)
Re:sucks to be them (Score:3, Informative)
I guess you are not a lawyer. While you may have violated a civil contract if you uncapped a modem, the fact is that you ALSO broke criminal laws. For example Texas has several state laws that include penalties of up to 6 months in jail for theft of cable services.
If I walk into a store and shoplift, say $500 worth of merchandise and get caught the consequences can include a felony conviction.
The fact is that what these people did was just as severe a crime. Now maybe the concept of the FBI actually making the arrest bothers some people, but in reality is that any different from the local or state police making the arrest? Probably not, in fact I would expect that the FBI would be a lot more professional about the whole thing.
Violating Service Contracts? (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, that the FBI got involved at all is an embarassment. No wonder that DC sniper took so long to find: the FBI is too busy holding the dicks of mega-corporations while they pee on the little guy.
Re:Violating Service Contracts? (Score:3, Funny)
I don't think the FBI would show up unless they had a somewhat valid case. The ATF, maybe, but not the FBI.
Re:Violating Service Contracts? (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally, I think the individual(s) at Buckeye should be held accountable for their estimate of $250,000+ in damages, assuming that the figure is inflated (and it seems that it is). What if my neighbor was being too loud when I was trying to sleep, and as a result, I called the police and reported multiple gunshots and screams coming from his house? While this case isn't perfectly analogous, the desired result seems to be the same. In essence, I'd be "teaching him a lesson." Unless this quarter of a million dollar figure is accurate, should someone at Buckeye not be held responsible? The FBI is not at the beck-and-call of every mid-size corporate goon with a bone to pick.
Re:Violating Service Contracts? (Score:3, Informative)
Only a matter of time... (Score:3, Informative)
Certain entities don't like it when you break their rules. In one sense you are not paying for their service, in another sense you are not stopping them from selling it to the neighbors. But, I don't think they would have been caught if they weren't causing some problems by using excessive bandwidth.
Lost Revenue (Score:4, Interesting)
It will be very interesting to see how long it is before Bucksnort..er, I mean, Buckeye loses the remaining client base it has. I am sure everyone is in agreement that sending in armed FBI agents over a breach of service contract is overkill. I doubt the intent was to scare away any other customers they have (and potentially could have had, because they overreact. But that's exactly what's going to happen.
What do they do if your bill is two days late? That would be on my mind, even though I tend to pay a hair early just to be on the safe side.
blank subject (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:blank subject (Score:3, Interesting)
Are they going to come and want you to prove that the music you have downloaded is yours? That you don't have the time to rip it but that you actually have the CD (no matter how bad of shape it is in)?
Are they going to check and see if the SHNs I have are of live shows?
These people were doing something that is OBVIOUSLY illegal. EASILY determined. My MP3/SHN collections are not.
Re:blank subject (Score:3, Interesting)
The ceo of one of the dot bombs I worked for had been acting funny for weeks. He started asking me to make availiable the inbox of a paticular secratary he had the hots for, citing she was bringin up a sexual harrassment lawsuit.
Well, on my own initiave I got into the company quickbooks and found out they were so deep in the red it hurt. I gave several co-workers the warning of impeding doom.
Before I left, I grabbed a box of cat5, 2 128 meg dimms, a tone and probe kit, and some cat5 crimpers and a celeron 400mhz system.
The day after I left I recieved an e-mail from the girl we had working HR, with a list of items that were "missing" None of the items on her list matched what I had taken. The e-mail stated I either return the "stolen" items or my check would be withheald.
Upon a quick onceover of my letter of offer, I didn't read anywhere where it stated they could do this. I called my lawer and asked him if this was legal, which is wasn't. I forwarded his response to the HR girl and got my check fed ex'd the next day.
I don't mind being accused of stealing something I really stole, but when it's something I didn't touch it really pisses me off.
Well about 2 weeks after I left, the CEO called up our guys in sacramento with some big speech. "Blah blah blah" was most of the speach and it ended when he said "Blah, can't pay you guys would you work for free?" From what I heard they walked outta there with everything that the company owned (leaving the leased dell laptops)
I dunno, just wanted to support your comment I guess bro, I know i've stolen shit before.
Re:blank subject (Score:4, Insightful)
Before I left, I grabbed a box of cat5, 2 128 meg dimms, a tone and probe kit, and some cat5 crimpers and a celeron 400mhz system.
Admit to snooping in the company books. Clever. Kind of illegal in many jurisdictions.
Admit to theft. Also clever. Very illegal, just about everywhere.
Post with a link to a website with pictures of your home and pets. Unbelievably clever. (I think it's cute that you ask people to hire you on the web page, by the way.)
Yes indeed, it's a shame that the FBI has trouble finding criminal masterminds like you.
Stealing is wrong (Score:3, Flamebait)
Cable companies simply cannot afford to let people steal this stuff. Quite literally, someone who is uncapping a cable modem and mooching 10 megabits of bandwidth could easily be costing them several thousand dollars a month.
I'm sorry, but I have no sympathy for these people. What they did not only violated their agreement, but it cost someone else a LOT of money. Stealing is stealing, folks. And unlike the arguments that may apply to software piracy, this really does directly affect someone else's pocketbook.
Manure (Score:3, Interesting)
Here is Dallas Attbi.com craps out every time it's windy or raining. The fools have no way of figuring out the cable leg is dead other than schedule a service call then wait for a barage of service calls to alert the local people that something is wrong.
They are stealing my time. Get another supplier? Tough they have a monopoly given them when they testified at the FCC hearing that thy would not increase rates if the requirements for having a second provider got eliminated.
Guess what happened within a year. Did these guys go to jail for perjury, Think not.
Re:Stealing is wrong (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Stealing is wrong (Score:5, Informative)
Two words for you. <b>Shared Bandwidth</b>. If bandwidth was *really* that expensive, you wouldn't see 3MBit DSL connections for $70 CDN/month, including the modem rental.
Corporations... (Score:3, Insightful)
I miss small "Mom and Pop" shops they are disappearing at a alarming rate. I think we need to be more aware of this and support your local "Mom and Pop" shop even though CVS might have a better deal.
I always support the little guy in my town. I will go to the local butcher shop before I go to "corporate grocery" store.
Due process? (Score:5, Insightful)
Ah well, so much for the right not to be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
Seriously...
Re:Due process? (Score:5, Informative)
Anybody with an IQ over 100 and a copy of the Constitution can tell you that law enforcement agencies should not be able to do something like this. Yet they do it all the time, even when they have absolutely no intention of pressing charges againt the people they do it to.
If you are suspected of being a drug dealer, you are in danger of having property such as your car or house being seized by police and auctioned off to the highest bidder, even if you are never officially charged.
There are some links to info at the LP homepage, I believe (http://www.lp.org).
Re:Due process? (Score:5, Interesting)
Now the fear mongers are talking up the terrorist in an effort to promote an agenda of world domination [sundayherald.com]. In the process, they are holding persons, sometimes U.S, citizens, indefinitely and without charges. Furthermore, torture is being seriously discussed. The recent U.S. election shows that the majority of the U.S. supports these suspensions of due process. Money is being diverted from domestic social programs. Again, under the assumption that the vast majority of Americans can consume and exist without worry of being subject to these new laws.
And we have the gall to complain that a few people have been arrested for stealing bandwidth. We expect to be taken seriously when we say we believed the laws would only apply to real criminals. Sometimes the hypocrisy of the country is beyond even my cynical belief.
A quote comes to mind
"First, they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me."
Niemöller.
When we are willing to really willing to move beyond our fear, then we can talk about how bad it is the goverment has the power to take stuff without due process.
A case of corporate greed (Score:3, Insightful)
guns (Score:3, Informative)
Hate to break it to ya, but FBI agents usually wear their sidearms even when off duty, and having them out when raiding a residence is standard (and smart, too - don't want agents being shot while they scramble for a weapon.
The gun wielding thing was added to the original article for sensationalism - the linked article in the original writeup didn't make a single mention of guns.
Sheesh... the outrage here over SOP (on behalf of people clearly guilty of theft of services). Bandwidth costs $$$ and I hope they get in a nice amount of trouble for what they did.
What's next? (Score:4, Insightful)
Uncapper Virus... (Score:5, Interesting)
"No officer, I didn't uncap my modem speed, it must have been that virus that has been going around..."
Re:Uncapper Virus... (Score:5, Insightful)
Another Step in the Wrong Direction (Score:5, Insightful)
Once again, we see an example of people doing something that is relatively harmless and given an unusually strict punishment simply because it is labelled as "cyber crime." The people who create some laws seem to have little understanding of the technologies that we use and their lack of knowledge is leading to some sort of irrational fear of any individual who commits any sort of crime using technology that they don't seem to understand. However, what makes this so disturbing is that modem capping was not said to be illegal in the article. It was referred to as "not legal." So has there been any legislation against this? Anytime? Anywhere?
And of course, even if there were then we should be disturbed. Was this "crime" any reason to confiscate so much of the offender's equpiment? Even a VCR was taken, but strangely, an XBox gaming console was left behind. I'm not sure what exactly it is that's motivating these steps in the wrong direction. Is it some sort of irrational fear that leads to those that commit computer crimes being put in the same category as terrorists (which they have been, BTW) even if their crime is simply that of "stealing" bandwidth? Ignorance may be bliss for those at Buckeye Cablesystems and other corporations and the governments that make laws protecting them, but it certainly isn't for the rest of us.
This is bad news, people. It seems that if you're committing anything that can be labelled "cybercrime" you can be given absurdly strict punishments just because your crime has that label.
Terrorists (Score:4, Troll)
Overkill (Score:5, Interesting)
FBI agents busting down the doors of Spammers?
Surely spammers with a 28.8 modem waste more resources than people that tweak a cable modem.
Scary (Score:5, Interesting)
Living in a share household bills sometimes went unpaid and Optus@Home 'disconnected' our service, meaning they disabled the dhcp account. We continued to get internet access for the next 6 months until someone finally tweaked that we hadn't got any bills for a while and called Optus. Boy were they mad, but at least we only got billed for the 6 months (honesty is not always the best policy kiddies).
All this crap, same with uncapping modems, could easily be prevented by the ISPs. If it's such a huge problem for them, why don't they take steps to prevent it happening? Insurance companies wont pay up if you forget to lock your car and it gets stolen
Contact the FBI. No, Seriously (Score:5, Interesting)
It sounds like this guy is the victim of abuse by a local government official. When that happens, it's a job for the FBI. He's in pain now, but if the FBI investigates and determines that local officials have overstepped their bounds by destroying the guy's business for having commited an offense that should probably result in a small monetary fine, then the local goverment official could actually be prosecuted. Following conviction (or even following acquital, as in the OJ case) there could be civil penalties. The wheels of justice grind slowly, but they do grind.
I can't help but be reminded of Boss Hogg from the Dukes of Hazzard. In real life, the Dukes could have the FBI take him out.
The same thing has happened in real life with a lot of cases, most noteably civil rights abuses in the South where local governments committed crimes against Blacks.
Re:Contact the FBI. No, Seriously (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, I suppose there would be a *serious* conflict of interest in asking the FBI to investigate itself. OTOH, asking the FBI to make an inquiry as to whether or not the local government was justified in requesting their services might have value. Perhaps the Department of Justice is the better venue. As you might have gathered, IANAL. The basic point I was trying to get across is that there is recourse for this guy. Also, I'd like to point out to the "America is coming to an end" crowd that throughout the history of the US, things like this have happened and will continue to happen. Who knows, maybe Runner vs. Ashcroft will be a landmark Supreme Court decision right up there with Brown vs. Board of Education. Or maybe it would be Runner vs. Toledo. The point is, the guy has a long and important fight ahead of him, and may come out OK after all. Stay tuned for the obligatory EFF or ACLU backed legal battle.
What were the actual loses?? (Score:5, Insightful)
The cable provider has a certain amount of bandwidth they provide their customers to the outside world. This is what they pay for. They pay that amount regardless of WHO is using it and when. The only loses the cable company should be able to claim is from the customers who cancelled their services because they were not getting expected rates and it can be proved these rates were lower because of a direct result of what these 11 people were doing. That is a very hard thing to prove. Compare the cancels/month directly related to bandwidth concerns before, during, and after these offenders were uncapping. If they are no different, there is no loses.
Even if they were originally capped at 1.5/128. The most you could really get out of a CM is what? 5mbit/500kbit maybe? The have the potential to get roughly just over 3 times what they were paying for. Divide this extra 3.5mbits among say 5000 subscribers and you get a potential loss of 700bit/sec per customer or roughly
Okay its late for me and my math may be off so please be easy if I made a dumb mistake and fell free reply with a recalc with your estimates if I am grossly underestimating something.
I am not saying what they did was justified, but the damage estimates are WAY off..
Re:What were the actual loses?? (Score:3, Informative)
RAM Drive (Score:3, Interesting)
one question (Score:4, Insightful)
So what happens when ... (Score:3, Insightful)
You could easily find the bulk of the subscribers on the cable company's line with uncapped modems through no fault of their own.
Of course the FBI could go after the owner(s) of the sites(s) with the link. (But suppose their sites had it because it had been installed by a nimda variant, so it wasn't THEIR fault, either?)
Or suppose somebody constructs and launches an email virus that, as its payload, uncaps cable modems? (Probably disguised as an add for faster internet access, ha ha.) Similar story, but no web sites to chase. (HOW MANY new viruses per day? HOW MANY authors actually caught?)
Whack-a-mole will only work for a little while.
Corruption in law enforcement (Score:3, Insightful)
First, that a powerful family is able to call in favors from the FBI and others in local law enforcement. Particularly stunning are the details of the unequal treatment of offenders (i.e. George Runner).
In a free, democratic society, those in government would have someone to answer to if among tens of thousands of people who committed the same crime, many were given wildly different responses depending on their background (i.e. ethnicity, religion, relationship to wealthy families).
Second, and this is something I hear a lot about lately, that the FBI is apparently empowered to s ieze property practically at random (his Windows CD's?) and hang on to it indefinitely (i.e. Wirtz's possessions "may never be returned"?).
In a free and democratic society, there is oversight regarding what law enforcement officers can take away from you - they have to have a legitimate reason for every article taken, and they absolutely have to return it promptly after their need is concluded.
Penalties for defrauding the FBI? (Score:3, Insightful)
Claiming that you've lost a lot of money when you've in fact failed to be paid a lot of money for services you accidentally provided beyond your contract is inherently somewhat suspect, and you should be in serious danger of legal action against you if you turn out not to have been due as much as you claimed.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Not Well thought out (Score:3, Funny)
This reminds me of how the EFF got started (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course the details are a bit different, but the overzealousness of law enforcement has an interestingly familiar ring.
Power? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm tempted to order cable internet just so i can let the guy show up, balk at the draconian contract, and tell him to shove it. Luckily i don't have that much time.
Civil vs criminal action (Score:3, Interesting)
What Buckeye Cable had with these folks is a dispute about whether they honored a clause in a contract. One could say that the real principle was the criminal system favored the business against the individual in the case of my relative, and again here. But in that case it really would be a criminal system. If it comes to that, turnabout is fair play, and there is then no ethical limitation on the individual scamming what he or she can from it. It's like stealing from the mob - hazardous to your health but not wrong. This is why it's so important that the system itself operate fairly, and not tilt towards corporations and businesses. Without fairness, the population my be terrorized, but cannot be governed.
Re:*SIGH* (Score:3, Funny)
Re:*SIGH* (Score:5, Insightful)
And I'm sure he called for lots of backup and confiscated your car, too, right? The problem is not that the law was broken; the problem is that the tactics used were those akin to what would be used against a terrorist, when in reality the suspect was nothing more that a petty thief.
Re:*SIGH* (Score:5, Funny)
Its called Excessive Force.
Re:*SIGH* (Score:4, Interesting)
A while back near here (central NC) some poor turkey was pulled over by the local sherr'f depptiy because he was driving a truck with a stolen lawn mower or some such in the back. Said master criminal ran into the woods to get away. Unfortunately for him a van full of SWAT team types on their way to a training class saw the flashing lights & pulled over. Called their buddies in another van and a K9 unit that was also headed to the training class. Borrowed a helicopter from the highway patrol that just happened to be completing repairs at an airport nearby. Finally the couple dozen cops, deputy dawg, and bear in the sky flushed a very scared petty thief out of the woods. If I were him I'd have been peeing in my pants too, wondering if they had mistaken me for an escaped child murderer or CEO or some other completely vile creature to be spending this many resources on hauling my butt out of the woods. Moral of the story - it wasn't excessive force, just excessive zeal on the part of a bunch of cops who decided they'd rather chase a bad guy than go to some ol' training class.
Re:*SIGH* (Score:3, Insightful)
Although people are presumed innocent until proven guilty, there is often need to collect the evidence to verify the facts of the case. If you go out and shoot someone, and it gets caught on video tape, they're going to find all your guns, round them up and send them off to some balistics lab for testing. You woun't see me argue with that. It makes sense and part of me sleeps a little better at night knowing that this is the way it is.
A lot of federal laws cover severe things that need elevated levels of attention.
The same would go for someone hacking into a bank. If they catch traffic from your computer hacking into a bank and stealing money, wether or not you're doing it, they need to take your computer. It needs to be analyzed and the people responsibe tried.
The true travisty here is accusing these uncappers of a Federal crime, this is realistically at most a misdemeanor. What the users did was blantantly wrong, I'm sure there's some 'no tamper' clause in one of the service contracts.
I think it would have been far more appropriate to black-list these people from local broadband, maybe the local Cable co work together with the local dsl providers, make it so these people can't get back online. That should be a deterrant enough.
There was absolutely no need to drag the feds in for this, it's little more than publicity stunt and a huge waste of our money.
What laws need more than anything else they can never have, true common sense, if they had that ninety-nine percent of the court systems would be pointless.
what about worse crimes? (Score:5, Insightful)
And how many Enron executives were arrested by the FBI at gun point?
A crime is a crime, isn't it?
Re:good (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Hello, police state (Score:2)
Re:Headache? (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, that analogy is skewed.
It's more like you bought a CD player at Best Buy, it was broken, they wouldn't take it back, they wouldn't refund your money and the only thing you had to do to get it working properly is break a "no user serviceable parts" seal and reseat a connector. Then the thugs burst through your door and charge you with an EULA violation.
In my opinion, not offering a refund after 3 months of completely unuseable service without a fix in sight is theft.
For the record, that part of town is too far from the CO for DSL, and the PS2 won't work with Satellite, dialup is too slow for the game in question and ATTBI is a legal monopoly in the area. As is Bellsouth, as every DSL provider resells their service and is dependent on Bell's infrastructure and engineers to get up off their lazy asses to actually bring a house live within 6 months of an order.
He *is* looking in to cellular broadband right now, however, as that's being beta tested in our area. 500ms ping doesn't look too good for fragging, though.
Of course he could sell his house and move 6 blocks closer to the CO so he's in a DSL-supported area, but that's overkill -- ain't it?